How low is low enough? Evaluation of various risk-assessment models for lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer: a Korean multicenter study

Objective: The aim of this study was to identify a standard for the evaluation of future models for prediction of lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer through estimation of performance of well-known surgicopathological models. Methods: Using the medical records of 947 patients with endometria...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of gynecologic oncology 2012-10, Vol.23 (4), p.251
Main Authors: Sok Bom Kang, Jong Min Lee, Jae Kwan Lee, Jae Weon Kim, Chi Heum Cho, Seok Mo Kim, Sang Yoon Park, Chan Yong Park, Ki Tae Kim
Format: Article
Language:Korean
Subjects:
Endometrial cancer
Low-risk group
Lymph node dissection
Lymphadenectomy
Prediction
Sensitivity and specificity
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective: The aim of this study was to identify a standard for the evaluation of future models for prediction of lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer through estimation of performance of well-known surgicopathological models. Methods: Using the medical records of 947 patients with endometrial cancer who underwent surgical management with lymphadenectomy, we retrospectively assessed the predictive performances of nodal metastasis of currently available models. Results: We evaluated three models included: 1) a model modified from the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) pilot study; 2) one from the GOG-33 data; and 3) one from Mayo Clinic data. The three models showed similar negative predictive values ranging from 97.1% to 97.4%. Using Bayes` theorem, this can be translated into 2% of negative post-test probability when 10% of prevalence of lymph node metastasis was assumed. In addition, although the negative predictive value was similar among these models, the proportion that was classified as low-risk was significantly different between the studies (56.4%, 44.8%, and 30.5%, respectively; p
ISSN:2005-0380